THE MORAL DISENGAGEMENT OF THE LEFT WITH THE MIDDLE EAST AND ITS ANTI-WESTERN PROXIES.
How the Left, with Its Suicidal Pacifism and Denial of the West, Betrays Human Rights.
The Western Left faces a profound contradiction that undermines its moral authority: it passionately champions gender equality, sexual freedom, and democracy while simultaneously ignoring, excusing, or even endorsing authoritarian regimes that blatantly violate these core values. From the theocracies of Iran and Saudi Arabia to authoritarian socialist states like Venezuela, the Left tolerates systems that execute dissidents, oppress women, and criminalize sexual diversity under the guise of anti-Westernism.
In Europe, this contradiction is exacerbated by a suicidal pacifism and a dangerous illusion that distancing themselves culturally and ideologically from the West, particularly the United States, grants them moral superiority over atrocities justified in the name of anti-imperialism. This delusion translates into a hazardous foreign policy, intellectual surrender to radical Islamism, and persistent hypocrisy in international human rights forums, where Western countries remain silent about their ideological allies while selectively condemning geopolitical rivals.
From a libertarian and objectivist perspective, the Left has abandoned universal principles of individual liberty, ensnared in dangerous cultural relativism, blind anti-Americanism, and a pathological denial of its own Western identity. This article deeply examines this moral and political inconsistency, addressing the Left’s main arguments and offering robust rebuttals grounded in libertarian principles.
MORAL RELATIVISM: THE SUICIDAL TOLERANCE OF OPPRESSION
Moral relativism is the cornerstone that enables the Left to subordinate human rights to supposed cultural sensitivity. Fearing accusations of “imperialism,” the Left excuses atrocities like female genital mutilation in Yemen, the stoning of women in Iran, or the repression of political opponents in Venezuela, claiming they must be understood in their cultural context. What would be considered femicide, homophobia, or authoritarian repression in Europe is framed as “cultural authenticity” or “resistance to imperialism” in these regimes.
Ayn Rand, in The Virtue of Selfishness (1964), warned of this danger: denying objective values in the name of cultural respect condemns individuals to tyranny. A stark contemporary example is the tepid response of the European Left to the 2022 death of Mahsa Amini in Iran, killed by the morality police for improperly wearing her hijab. While Iranian women risked their lives protesting oppression, Western activists superficially debated whether the hijab was empowering or speculated about Western conspiracies to discredit Iran’s regime.
Isaiah Berlin persuasively argued that tolerance of oppressive systems perpetuates human suffering—a truth the European Left, trapped in its illusory pacifism, consistently ignores. This stance is not only intellectually dishonest but directly contributes to sustaining despotic regimes. When relativism becomes policy, justice dissolves.
ANTI-AMERICANISM: A DISTORTED MORAL COMPASS
For many Leftist intellectuals and activists, mere opposition to the United States is enough to justify uncritical support for a regime. This simplistic logic has led to defending dictatorships like Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran solely for their anti-American stance. In Europe, this is compounded by the absurd belief that they are culturally distinct from the West, allowing them to adopt a false posture of moral neutrality toward oppressive regimes.
Murray Rothbard, in For a New Liberty (1973), declared that “liberty demands rejecting any aggression, regardless of its source.” Yet, the Left often ignores or downplays documented atrocities, such as the extrajudicial executions and torture by Venezuela’s regime reported by Amnesty International, to maintain its anti-American ideological stance.
This attitude extends to diplomacy, where the European Left has defended or tolerated the inclusion of oppressive regimes in international human rights bodies, granting them institutional legitimacy. Examples like Iran’s election to the UN Commission on the Status of Women or the impunity of Hamas’s war crimes while Israel is selectively condemned reveal a double standard driven by geopolitics disguised as morality.
PERFORMATIVE PROGRESSIVISM: THE TYRANNY OF THE TRIVIAL
The Western Left’s current progressivism is highly selective and performative, fixating on symbolic and trivial debates while remaining complicitly silent on severe human rights violations. In Europe, this manifests in superficial discussions about inclusive language or gender-neutral bathrooms while ignoring female genital mutilation in Yemen or forced child marriages in Afghanistan.
This irony is particularly glaring in the context of intersectional rhetoric. The Left, supposedly committed to defending vulnerable groups, systematically overlooks the multiple oppressions faced by individuals under authoritarian regimes. Paul Berman, in Terror and Liberalism (2003), noted how the European Left, in its zeal to avoid accusations of Islamophobia, sidesteps clear condemnation of political Islamism that perpetrates these atrocities.
Intersectionality, in theory, seeks to understand how different forms of oppression interact. Yet, when applied selectively, the Left creates a hierarchy of victims: the more anti-Western the oppressor, the less accountability is demanded. Thus, real victims are obscured behind ideological narratives.
INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY: THE ONLY VALID ETHICAL STANDARD
From a libertarian and objectivist perspective, individual liberty is the only universally valid moral criterion. Ludwig von Mises, in Human Action (1949), clearly established that a just social order can only be based on individual autonomy. This fundamental principle is universal, not exclusive to Western tradition.
By excusing or justifying regimes like Iran or Venezuela under cultural or geopolitical pretexts, the Left abandons this principle and betrays the only possible foundation for a universal ethic. The Cato Institute empirically confirms that countries respecting individual liberty achieve the best outcomes in social and economic well-being.
Moreover, this is not just about ethics but tangible results. Countries embracing individual liberty tend to foster more innovative, open, and prosperous societies. In contrast, anti-Western authoritarian regimes exhibit high rates of poverty, repression, and forced exile. It is no coincidence that millions flee Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, or Afghanistan to seek refuge in the “imperialist” countries the Left so fiercely criticizes.
COUNTERARGUMENTS AND REBUTTALS
The Left often defends its stance with several fallacies, including:
“Criticizing these regimes is Islamophobia or colonialism.”
False. Critiquing the totalitarian ideology of political Islamism or dictatorships is not hatred of Muslims nor colonialism. Ignoring human suffering under these regimes out of fear of such accusations is deeply racist and paternalistic.
“Supporting anti-Western regimes is resistance to imperialism.”
This perverts the true concept of resistance. Backing authoritarian regimes for their anti-Western stance merely swaps one form of oppression for another. As Amartya Sen warned, individual liberty is a prerequisite for development, not a Western privilege.
“National sovereignty must be respected.”
Sovereignty is no excuse for human rights violations. When a regime commits crimes against its people, it forfeits its legitimacy as a government. As the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights notes, using sovereignty to shield authoritarianism is one of the gravest threats to the international system.
FROM DEFENDERS OF RIGHTS TO ENABLERS OF REGIME
S
Trapped in moral relativism, illusory pacifism, and pathological anti-Americanism, the Western Left has abandoned its core principles and betrayed the very cause it claims to champion. Only an unwavering commitment to individual liberty can restore its ethical and moral coherence.
In the face of theocracy, totalitarianism, and systemic oppression, there is no room for excuses. The Left that justifies these atrocities has ceased to be progressive and has become complicit in oppression. It is time to demand consistency, ethics, and a moral compass grounded in liberty, not geopolitics. The principle of non-aggression, the defense of individual rights, and objective truth must once again be the cornerstone of any truly progressive discourse.
USEFUL LINKS AND DIRECT SOURCES
¿Te preparo también una meta descripción SEO, etiquetas, y un resumen para redes sociales tipo X o Instagram?